Approvals for New and Substantively Modified Academic Programs

Academic program development

The development of any new academic degree or certificate program requires school, institutional, and Maryland Higher Education Commission review and approval. Any new academic program must also secure its school’s approval to proceed to institutional approval. Institutional approval involves the following steps.

1. Consideration by the Academic Program Review Group (APRG). This can occur concurrent with school consideration and should ideally occur at the beginning of the program development/consideration process as an initial point of review to help identify potential internal and external obstacles to the program’s approval and success. The APRG group will occasionally make recommendations on the proposal’s content that best positions it for successful MHEC review. Program contacts should complete an academic program proposal form for the group’s consideration. The APRG includes the Executive Vice Provost, Senior Associate Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education, and Director of Government Affairs – Maryland.
2. The APRG typically schedules bi-weekly meetings. It will, not infrequently, recommend changes to a proposal, or a suspension in consideration while factors that might affect the program’s approval are discussed. Consequently, schools should be aware that proposals may need to be re-routed through internal school approval processes if APRG recommends substantive changes.
3. Letter of Intent – Maryland Higher Education Commission. State law requires that the university submit to MHEC a Letter of Intent for any new graduate programs. Following successful consideration by the APRG, the Office of the Provost will submit to the MHEC a Letter of Intent using information solicited during APRG’s review. The LOI is intended to: (a) facilitate collaboration between institutions and (b) allow the Commission to provide early feedback regarding concerns about unnecessary duplication or unreasonable program duplication. If a proposal successfully navigates the LoI process, the school pursues its ordinarily applicable school governance processes affecting academic program development and consideration.
4. PhD programs and Doctor of Philosophy Board. If the proposal is for a PhD, it requires review and approval by the university’s Doctor of Philosophy Board. Consideration and approval by the Board is necessary before remittance to the Council of Deans.
5. Council of Deans (CoD). The Council of Deans will consider all new academic programs, including graduate programs that have successfully navigated both APRG review and the MHEC LoI process. To receive CoD consideration a program contact must complete a MHEC proposal using the proposal template and submit to the Academic Compliance Officer for their review and recommendations. Once approved, the Senior Associate Vice Provost for Academic Affairs will remit the proposal to the CoD for its review.
6. MHEC submission and review.  Following successful CoD review, and if the proposal is MHEC ready, the Academic Compliance Officer will submit it to MHEC and manage the interactions with and management of MHEC directives. Note that MHEC only accepts submissions on the 1st and 15th of the month. Subject to MHEC, a review can take anywhere from sixty days to one year. The Office of the Provost will communicate review progress and its outcomes to all constituents. This will include the proposal’s school of origin, Office of the University Registrar, Office of Institutional Research, and the Office of International Services.

Other program actions that require state review

• Changes that affect more than one half of the curriculum of an existing academic program.
  “Substantial modifications” to existing programs require the same internal and external process as that which applies to entirely new academic programs – excepting graduate programs, which as existing programs eschew the MHEC Letter of Intent process.
• Changes to a program’s title.
• Changes to a program’s Classification of Instructional Program code. More on the CIP code change process and policy is available from the Office of the University Registrar.
• Offering an existing program at a non-Johns Hopkins location. This could also require Middle States Commission on Higher Education approval.
• Certificate programs being developed from curriculum in an existing approved program.
• Changes to a program’s modality, including rendering a previously face-to-face program a distance education program.

Please consult with the Academic Compliance Officer if you are considering any of the above changes to existing programs. This program review life-cycle graphic provides an illustrated summary of the above text, and outlines which steps apply to which type of program proposal.